Fi Shing, As far as I know there is nothing in any policy about decommissioning resources. (I'm not even sure what that would mean in practice...) I don't think that such a proposal would get consensus in the RIPE community, but I am often wrong so if you want this then please submit a policy proposal. The RIPE NCC staff, the working group chairs, or some friendly community member can help you with this. Cheers, -- Shane On 08/03/2019 22.25, Fi Shing wrote:
/But Marco's response mentions to *correcting* the contact addresses, not just verifying them. That involves working with human beings, so it makes sense that it will take a while./ / / No it doesn't - that was the whole point of the "change" in the first place, that it was to reduce the amount of verification needed to be done by RIPE. There is a simple automated way to verify the entries - click a link, enter a CAPTCHA, or your resources are decommissioned within 24 hours.
How much crime can be committed in the months it has taken (and continues to take)?
-------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Verification of abuse contact addresses ? From: Shane Kerr <shane@time-travellers.org <mailto:shane@time-travellers.org>> Date: Fri, March 08, 2019 9:40 pm To: anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net <mailto:anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net>
Fi Shing,
I'm sure verifying the delivery of 70k e-mails (or however many is in the database) can be done in a few hours.
But Marco's response mentions to *correcting* the contact addresses, not just verifying them. That involves working with human beings, so it makes sense that it will take a while.
Cheers,
-- Shane
On 08/03/2019 11.07, Fi Shing wrote: > If it takes more than a week to verify your entire database, there is > the first sign that something is wrong with your system. > > > -------- Original Message -------- > Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Verification of abuse contact addresses ? > From: Marco Schmidt <mschmidt@ripe.net <mailto:mschmidt@ripe.net> ><mailto:mschmidt@ripe.net>> > Date: Thu, March 07, 2019 10:03 pm > To: "Ronald F. Guilmette" <rfg@tristatelogic.com <mailto:rfg@tristatelogic.com> > <mailto:rfg@tristatelogic.com>>, > anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net <mailto:anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net> <mailto:anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net> > > Hello Ronald, > > We are planning to publish an updated timeline soon. > > Ultimately, our implementation will depend of the level of cooperation > we get from LIRs and the nature of issues that need to be fixed before > an abuse contact can be updated (for example, some organisations may > need to reset their maintainer password). > > Over the next few weeks we will be analysing our progress, to make a > realistic estimation. From observations so far, we think we might be > able to finish our initial validation of all abuse contacts within six > months - but it is still too early to make any strong predictions. > > Kind regards, > Marco Schmidt > RIPE NCC > > > On 05/03/2019 21:51, Ronald F. Guilmette wrote: > > In message <9c95c110-d5a3-e94a-6b3c-b02030736e7c@ripe.net <mailto:9c95c110-d5a3-e94a-6b3c-b02030736e7c@ripe.net> > <mailto:9c95c110-d5a3-e94a-6b3c-b02030736e7c@ripe.net>>, > > Marco Schmidt <mschmidt@ripe.net <mailto:mschmidt@ripe.net> ><mailto:mschmidt@ripe.net>> wrote: > > > >> It is correct that the implementation phase is still ongoing. Currently > >> we are validating all the abuse contact information referenced in LIR > >> organisation objects. Then we will proceed with the validation of abuse > >> contacts referenced in LIR resource objects - the example that you > >> mentioned belongs to this group. And finally all abuse contacts > >> referenced in End User (sponsored) objects will be validated. > > Thanks for the info Marco. > > > > I guess the only question I would ask is this: Is there a published > > timeline for how this whole process is planned to play out, and for > > when it is planned to be completed? > > > > > > Regards, > > rfg > > > >